-
Here I played to a backing track supplied by Fep programming BIAB. Obviously there's no interaction and I'd never use it live. I've played this tune a lot alone with no backing track. I've played it live with bands. But I wanted to hear me play it so I recorded it with a backing track. I think because I've played it by myself you can really hear the changes. I'm not skating through them.
-
11-07-2014 02:59 AM
-
My thinking over this ...
Originally Posted by Reg
Since more less simillar set of chords and extensions can come from various references, scales in particular, one can treat progression differently on each repetition (and all subdivisions of the principle). Something will fit nicely, other will be forced to, turned into blues ... That's how I understood it, at least that's what I'm attempting to do.
Coming from out of Jazz, I dont like backing to adapt to closely to my playing. It forces me to work to much and eventually dulls the tune, because as soon as I make something interesting, it becomes straight again. I much prefer the band to play, more less, standard and soloist of the moment to have all the freedom to make it happen, with safety net to count on. If band is changing too much and too often, safety net is much smaller, sometimes non existent.
While that may be what separate girls from men, I'd always rather choose good sounding girls, over bad sounding manly Jazzers. One could say it is a win win situation.
To repeat my position, I think backing tracks are against the perception of Jazz. Professional musicians have to do it to earn their living, but playing "brunch jazz standards" over backing tracks ... Sorry, that is not Jazz. Even without backing tracks, all the brunches, lunches, ...., they can only be treated as "paid for" rehearsals for the real thing, which is clubs and concerts.Last edited by Vladan; 11-07-2014 at 07:02 AM.
-
I dug that - nice one Originally Posted by henryrobinett
-
Originally Posted by Reg
I didn't catch this the first time I read that. Can you explain this?
Static harmony means unchanging harmony. Aeborsold style backing tracks are deliberately the opposite of that. Unless it's the "major or minor" book or whatever. How are you going to learn to extend minor 7th chords and figure out what they sound like when you're playing over Satin Doll at 120 bpm when the minor chords only pop up for two beats at a time. I'm just not sure I follow where backing tracks qualify as "static" in terms of harmonic motion.
-
Each time you play prerecorded backing track, the whole arrangement, chord sequence will repeat exactly the same, together with all the variety, ultimately losing proposed variety along the way.
-
That was a great illustration of your point about interaction.
I can hear your playing taking different directions and going from playful to somber, but the BIAB is oblivious to it. When you take it up a notch and add some intensity, I can almost picture you turning to look at your band and they are ignoring you, blissfully in their own world.
Thanks, although the reality is a bit of a letdown because even though I can sound pretty good now playing with BIAB, I now see there is a certain disjointedness to the whole process. The band does not seem quite as "alive" unless they can flow with the soloist.
Yet another skill I have to learn...(sigh).
But then again, it keeps this thing fun and challenges me onward.
-
I think you mean "oh cool! Yet another skill I get to learn!"
-
Hey IWB...Sure Originally Posted by inwalkedbud
Static harmony... as you said unchanging harmony. Just as a Imaj7 can become a Imaj9, same harmonic reference... unchanging. Now add a III- or a VI-... or take a II- and add a V7... now make a I VI II V... what happens and is very common practice in jazz is for series of chords to become Chord Patterns... established patterns of chords which become One harmonic reference... I play a pattern of chords... which imply one target, one harmonic reference.
Most chord patterns are derived from Jazz Tunes, use of extended subs or from creating a pedal or ostinato effects.
They can be used like static harmony... and just like avoid notes over one basic chord in a context.... chord patterns also can function in similar contexts...they can become one harmonic target... static harmony, yes it becomes more complicated, and if you don't understand the basic reference or the tune or whatever changes your playing over etc... your going to have problems.
This concept is not like the only way to play etc... like most applications, it's simply an option for creating relationships with a reference and developing them.
So most guitarist are still working on just being able to spell, imply, create melodic lines through, above, behind, around...whatever... just be able to play tunes and not sound like lousy... or something like that. So is that the end... just spell changes, create lines with reference to chord tones and the melody, add some embellishment.
Personally No... that's the beginning, now your ready to start playing in a jazz style. Being able to reference series of changes as one harmonic reference is just one more level of understanding and playing.
Hey Henry... very cool playing.
-
Gotcha ... I see where you're going w this. I suppose if one could play a ii V slowly on a loop for a million measures and call it a static sort of practice tool then in theory you could have a 32 bar "static" practice tool w more chords. I was referring to the more traditional theoretical "static harmony" as repetive chord changes lacking a resolution or overall direction on its own.... So while Recordme is a tune w resolutions etc the four measures of Am7 would be a static harmony. I see what you mean I think we're just defining it differently. Me in a theoretical way and you in a practical way. Since this is a thread about practicing then I'll go with your terms!
i would argue that even if it could be considered an aural reference point like you say ... That it would be too complex a harmonic reference w too fast a a harmonic rhythm for *most* musicians to practice w effectively.Last edited by inwalkedbud; 11-07-2014 at 10:26 AM.
-
Thank you Henry. That was great fun to listen to. Question, though - would your playing have been less enjoyable and creative if you had practiced the tune using that backing track as opposed to without it?
-
And further to the question above, if practicing with a backing track makes one "lazier" as regards spelling out the changes, does that necessarily mean the improv is less valuable? If practicing n your own, you probably wouldn't leave as much space, or play simple, long or repeated notes so much. All things that make improv more musical.
I mean, it's not a competition, right?, - "see who can sound like they're making all the changes without backing , the best..." Sure, I get it that if you can imply the changes, then chances are you can have the choice to spell them out or not.
But do you really have that choice? If you've been practicing that way for years, you might develop habits where you can't help but to hit too many target notes, which can be as boring as not hitting enough, no?
-
Hey IWB... yea... we're on a jazz guitar forum... calling a II V a static harmony isn't anything pushing the envelop, just play the II V ...two beats each at 200 or faster... it becomes one reference pretty quick. The 3rd resolving to the 7th is just a voicing and performance detail... it doesn't define the harmonic movement... it's your choice, it's all going on whether you choose to perform it or not. You can just as easily call it static as chord tones moving around over one chord.
And yes maybe too fast for many guitarist... but if most guitarist who wanted to be able to play in a jazz style just put in a little organized time they would have the skills required to cover. I mean basically we're just talking about keeping two tonal references going on at once. No right or wrong, just different choices.
-
@princeplanet - or like Henry did, you can play along with just bass and drums backing track in which case the soloist is more responsible for "providing the changes".
-
Hey Frank... nice track... with walking bass... the harmony is spelled or implied pretty well. Did you spell more than 7th chords, or does BIAB make harmonic choices based on samples of jazz progressions etc...
-
Well I do play a lot and don't leave enough space. That's always been the case. I have to work hard at leaving space. Playing alone where I outline the changes might contribute. But I gotta tell you, I hear players who don't hit the changes and it drives me a little nuts. Do they not hear them, not know them or can't play them? But it's obvious when they're skating through. It rarely ever sounds good to me.
-
I do my own subs, extensions.
-
Im not disagreeing I'm just going to say that most of that organized time involves hitting the individual changes and doing so slowly before the whole thing. This is also talking about using it as a tonal reference. If you're practicing subs and stuff then there's a lot of organized time that comes before playing changes for the whole time at tempo. If you're practicing phrasing lines at 220 bpm which is a skill in and of itself then playing the whole tune at tempo will probably be beneficial. So I think a lot of this comes down to being VERY honest with yourself about what you're practicing. Being very specific as well. "Lines" I suppose is a pretty general thing to be practicing. Maybe a question for the original poster of this thread... What exactly are you looking to work on w lines? Playing at 250bpm? Being more harmonically precise? Particular extensions? Etc... Maybe we can hone in a little with that. Originally Posted by Reg
Bear in mind I'm using "you" as a general thing... Not talking about Reg or Henry or anyone in particular.
-
@PaulD That's really great. 'Fronting tracks' are a great idea. I aspire to play that well.
@henryrobinett Great playing. Monk is difficult. My favorite takes on that tune by guitarists: Bobby Broom on 'Plays for Monk'; Adam Rogers on John Patitucci's 'Line by Line'; Bill Frisell on Paul Motian's 'Monk in Motian'.
Here's an example of what I consider practicing with a backing track lately. Fire up a recording device and lay down some chords with a metronome, then try to to solo over it. I'm not thrilled with my playing, but hopefully it gets the point across that I'm using the track to work out the chords, melody, and playing over the changes.
Last edited by logictweek; 11-08-2014 at 02:48 AM.
-
Originally Posted by inwalkedbud
What is hitting changes... you can't spell out what you don't hear or understand.
There is obviously this established practice of spelling out basic triads or 7th chords with standard voice leading... if that's it, then I would think you need to know what the notes are and what the notes are suppose to do... Or you can memorize and train your ears and playing to do so.
So once you have this skill down, the spelling and accepted, or organized resolutions... or movement of the chord tones as you play through the changes... now what, use that skill or practice to create beautiful or cool lines playing through changes or tunes.
Or do you now become aware of the possible chord extensions and their voice leading, then subs... whatever other possible additional chords or harmonic applications which can add and change chords and some notes and also have voice leading details. Again this is very available information and not that complicated.
So when you get to that point that you can imply changes and whatever else you want your lines to cover, technically, do you understand what this skill is about, or have you trained yourself to react in situations.
Personally I've always done both...
And personally... there are more choices.
So take a set of changes... the "A" section of a tune... whatever... play at a tempo you can be conscious of what your doing, now spell the changes.
Now try and figure out what you were using as a reference for defining what the changes were. A basic tonal center or key reference, Melodic minor, did you use some Modal interchange or Modal licks... maybe some Blue Notes. What did the notes that were not chord tones imply... they are usually from harmonic applications. Melodic embellishments have implications.
Generally we just plug and play... our preconceived lines. Now try relative maj and min applications, and relative II V usage. This basically lets you mechanically spell different chord tone organization... with almost diatonic relationships.
Take Joy Spring.. Instead of spelling out
/ Fma7 ..../ G-7........ C7...... / Fmaj7 .. / Bb-7... Eb7.. / spell...
/A-7b13.../ Bbma6/9..Eb9#11/ A-7b13../ Dbma9 C7#9 /
This is just a BS example from top of my head... I can hear.... but anyway, if I played or spelled those changes... what would you hear?
Just in case... A-7b13 is a relative III- min relationship to Fmaj7... instead of relative VI-. Bbma6/9 is relative Maj lydian of G-7, Sub-dom sub. Eb9 is relative min relationship with Modal Interchange of C7.
Dbma9 is again Maj lydian relationship from Bb-7... and the C7#9 is just the related V7 of G-7b5...a voicing or diatonic sub of Eb7..
These are standard plug and play subs with reference to spelling out changes... Now if I can hear these changes and spell them as I play... but someone doesn't hear them.... am I wrong.
I'm not worry... I'm really just trying to get some thinking going on. maybe open some doors.
-
BIAB did the bass, I just input the chords from Henry's chart, set a tempo, picked a style. Originally Posted by Reg
-
[QUOTE=Reg;474457]
Take Joy Spring.. Instead of spelling out
/ Fma7 ..../ G-7........ C7...... / Fmaj7 .. / Bb-7... Eb7.. / spell...
/A-7b13.../ Bbma6/9..Eb9#11/ A-7b13../ Dbma9 C7#9 /
This is just a BS example from top of my head... I can hear.... but anyway, if I played or spelled those changes... what would you hear?
/QUOTE]
I feel like I'm being pretty explicit about my objection to using backing tracks to practice lines. You said they serve as a harmonic reference for subs etc and I don't see that as a particularly efficient way to practice subs and train the ole ear bone.
How about this ... your example is a super cool nice way to play changes ... how does this example apply to the whole practicing with backing tracks? Imagine for a moment that these are new ... so you're learning the harmony ... how would you practice this with a backing track?
Wouldn't you want to really get a Bbma6/9 chord over a G bass note in your ear first? In what way does jamming over a backing track with these four measures help you? Once you've gotten that wouldn't you want to get the sound of an A-7b13 over an F into your ear? After you did that wouldn't you combine the two and then move the the next one? And then combine the next two? And then all three?
Furthermore ... if you input some chords into Band In a Box or you use an Aeborsold recording of Joy Spring then how do you know that the pianist or the computer isn't playing (or generating or whatever) the following subs ---- FMaj13 - Abm7 Db7 - Gmin7 C7 - CMaj7 - Fmin7 A7 - AbMaj7 ----- In what way does playing over a backing track of Joy Spring help you internalize your subs? Again maybe if you sound killin over tempos between 100 and 150 and you'd love to sound equally excellent at 250 so you practice phrasing and stamina over backing tracks at that tempo then I can see backing tracks as a viable option. For training your ear ... I really really don't. Not unless you already have all of the voice leading and individual sounds in your ear and under your fingers first. I very much believe that you have those sounds under your fingers. I don't think for most practicing people (and frankly anyone who's trying to get something new in their ear) that it's a really practical practice tool.
Again .. I'm not disagreeing with a single thing you say ... I just don't really see how it contradicts or responds to my objection to backing tracks as a way of internalizing harmony.
-
To my uneducated ear, when I'm trying to get the sound of a superimposed sub in my line playing, I really find a backing track useful. Sure, singing the bass note helps, just not as much. Besides, I've seen piano players, and one in particular with "an off the chart ear", always work out their right hand lines against their left hand chords. You also see horn players strike a piano chord to try lines over. What's the big deal?
Really, I don't see why some of you folks see this as a cardinal sin! I just can't believe that If I never practiced lines playing unaccompanied, that I would be a vastly inferior player. Maybe slightly inferior...
Last edited by princeplanet; 11-09-2014 at 09:36 AM.
-
I, for one, never said it was a sin, or particularly bad. It's helpful and useful. I just think ALSO being able to play through changes without them builds bigger testicles.
-
Hehe, OK, I'll buy that... Originally Posted by henryrobinett
-
Another thing I take from this thread as I alluded to earlier- I no longer think that I can play with a band just because I can play with BIAB or other backing tracks.
This was a misconception that crept in somewhere along the way in my journey.
Maybe I can at least try to practice reacting to the BIAB backing tracks band's comping nuances.
What is interesting is that they don't change so after a few choruses, I should be able to anticipate the little rhythmic and chordal variances and come up with various responses to them in my solo.
Reply With Quote
“Shearing style”
Today, 05:26 PM in Comping, Chords & Chord Progressions